Despite the intense skepticism, a small community of scientists is still investigating near-room-temperature fusion reactions. The latest news occurred last week, when Italian scientists Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi of the University of Bologna announced that they developed a cold fusion device capable of producing 12,400 W of heat power with an input of just 400 W. Last Friday, the scientists held a private invitation press conference in Bologna, attended by about 50 people, where they demonstrated what they claim is a nickel-hydrogen fusion reactor. Further, the scientists say that the reactor is well beyond the research phase; they plan to start shipping commercial devices within the next three months and start mass production by the end of 2011.

I've been interested in this for years. I run a science fiction magazine, abyssapexzine.com, and I keep current with trends: when I go to conventions we have experts from places like MIT, Fermi Lab, Lawrence Livermore, etc giving lectures on what's new in Physics. I read a lot, too. I also have friends who are physicists. According to them, yes cold fusion works and the main reason it was sidelined for the last 20 years was university politics. That being said,don't get your hopes up. It is is not "fusion" like nuclear fusion (which is a huge power source but very VERY dangerous compared to fission, for technical reasons). Here's what I have discovered.

1. Cold fusion is not much of a power source. It might make nice batteries.

2. It requires Paladium, whihc is a rare, precious metal

3. It has been remarked that it should be called "pressure fusion" rather than "cold" fusion. ANd it takes energy to make that pressure.

In my understanding, they say they are transforming Nickel and Hydrogen to Copper, and gaining some energy in the process. Someone I know with a physics background was very sceptical, saying that they are a few neutrons short from doing what they think they are doing.

Also, the Italian scientists themselves did not like it to be called "cold fusion", they used some other term (which I have forgotten).

"This recent public demonstration alone is is a huge development, but what's more, they also claim to be going into production, expecting to have these available for purchase commercially within a year. This would become the world's first commercially-ready "cold fusion" device. The first units are supposed to ship in three months, with mass production commencing by the end of 2011."

If this claim is true, then it's something very positive. It would show we can be a little more optimistic about our capacity to address the approaching energy deficit. If it's not true, then those behind it are very publicly wasting a lot of people's time.

Palladium doesn't seem to be specifically mentioned as part of the process used, though details are vague. Even if it uses nickel alone, then it does bring to mind questions about supply and extraction of nickel etc.

Palladium doesn't seem to be specifically mentioned as part of the process used, though details are vague. Even if it uses nickel alone, then it does bring to mind questions about supply and extraction of nickel etc.

The metal palladium is all over the wiki description of cold fusion. Be mindful that cold fusion is not a real energy source for mankind, should you choose to study the topic. An excerpt:

The most basic setup of a cold fusion cell consists of two electrodes submerged in a solution of palladium and heavy water. The electrodes are then connected to a power source to transmit electricity from one electrode to the other through the solution.[68] Even when anomalous heat is reported, it can take weeks for it to begin to appear - this is known as the "loading time."

The Chinese government just announced they’ve made a breakthrough in nuclear fuel reprocessing technology that would increase the reuse rates of nuclear fuel by 60 fold. Though nuclear power remains a touchy subject in the United States, countries around the world — like France, the UK and Russia — are turning to it as a ready-for-the-market technology that can wean them off coal-fired power plants in order to reduce emissions. Reprocessing, disposal and mining are at the top of the list of nuclear energy concerns, but if China’s new breakthrough proves fruitful it could help to diminish the problems that arise with all three.

Things are getting interesting. There is a company in the 'States', AmpEnergo, that is going to build 300,000 1 mega-watt generators a year. Their 1st one will be completed in October 2011? An ex-under secretary of the DOE is involved?

I believe Dr. Andrea Rossi has got an Italian Patent. He's still trying to get a world-wide patent (US)?

Even the Oil Drum is head lining this at this very moment (one of Chris Martinson's Recommended Sites)

It's simple. If you want the credibility of science then you have to play by the very rules that give it it's credibility. The rules are that it has to be peer reviewed and it needs to reproducible. Science isn't done through press releases. Yes, it's slow but in the long run it works better than anything else we've got. The peak oil crowd is overrun by pseudoscience promoters and quacks. It would do the movement a great deal of good to be more critical of its own.

Josey, the inventors of the E-cat say that they do not understand the nuclear reactions that are happening, and that they discovered it by accident. You cannot publish something you don't understand, and if you did, you would no longer be able to patent it. This is not primarily science, but an invention, and going for patents is the right approach. The inventors are not really trying to convince ayone of it working, instead they invest their own money (and afaik nobody else's) into the commercialization. They themselves seem to believe in it.

After reading more about it (like this), I start to be cautiously optimistic towards it!

You cannot publish something you don't understand, and if you did, you would no longer be able to patent it.

You can publish after a patent has been applied for without invalidating the patent as "known state of the art". You can also publish something which is not understood by giving all the inputs, material and chemical, and describing the consequences, outputs. It is only necessary for the publication to be acceptable to peers.

An outststanding example of publication without the understanding of mechanism is Darwin's "On the Origin of Species".

Absolutely right. You can publish an outbreak of an unknown disease or condition as well as case reports that haven't been explained yet. There's a whole branch of science called "descriptive science" that although less funded, is still valid and very necessary. The success of science is derived from it's method and anytime someone skips immediately to a press release with huge claims, red flags should go up.

There's a whole branch of science called "descriptive science" that although less funded, is still valid and very necessary. The success of science is derived from it's method and anytime someone skips immediately to a press release with huge claims, red flags should go up.

This reminds me of one of my favorite science quotes:

"All science is either physics or stamp collecting." -Ernest Rutherford

There's a whole branch of science called "descriptive science" that although less funded, is still valid and very necessary. The success of science is derived from it's method and anytime someone skips immediately to a press release with huge claims, red flags should go up.

This reminds me of one of my favorite science quotes:

"All science is either physics or stamp collecting." -Ernest Rutherford

(Hee-Hee)

I bet he said that before and not after he won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Ha!:)

"A Chief NASA scientist, Dennis Bushnell has came out in support of Andrea Rossi's E-Cat technology, but denies any type of nuclear fusion is taking place, saying it is probably beta decay per the Widom Larson Theory. "

It's simple. If you want the credibility of science then you have to play by the very rules that give it it's credibility. The rules are that it has to be peer reviewed and it needs to reproducible. Science isn't done through press releases. Yes, it's slow but in the long run it works better than anything else we've got. The peak oil crowd is overrun by pseudoscience promoters and quacks. It would do the movement a great deal of good to be more critical of its own.

Josey you are 100% correct!These scientists have been exposed as charlitans. I attended the IMSA (Illinois Math and Science Academy) located in Batavia, IL at FERMILAB so I hear these Cold Fusion claims all the time and they are ALWAYS bogus. Don't beleive these guys for a second.

-They claimed this device has been running a factory for 2 years but nobody has ever seen it and there never was a factory!-There is NO theoretical foundation to their work... As in they have no idea what is happening so how can they say that energy is being produced? (This sounds exactly like the "Perpetual Motion" machines that come out every few years only to find they actually run on a battery source...LOL)-They said not only did they test the reactor, but they are ready to ship them to buyers who are willing to pay...and they are also selling the Brooklyn Bridge too!-It has not been peer reviewed and nobody can reproduce their work-Their patent has been denied and rightly so because it explains nothing of how it works or what it does, LOL. (For some reason I can't post a link because this forum uses old crappy forum software. Please upgrade to vBulletin!! Google: Patentscope WO2009125444)-They are claiming that they want to bring their product to market and that it's a conspiricy by big oil companies and power companies to keep it off the market...yeah ok?

These Italian "scientists" are nothing more than snake oil salesmen trying to get investors to fall for their trick. As the rap group Public Enemy once said..."Don't beleive the hype".

<blockquote>Dr. Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy is looking at Lattice-assisted Nuclear Reactions (LANR) Cold Fusion as a part of implementing President Obama’s ambitious agenda to invest in clean energy, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, address the global climate crisis, and create millions of new jobs.</blockquote>

In this video Andrea Rossi calculates the energy produced by the E-Cat used in his demonstration to Mr. Krivit. To summarize the video, Mr. Rossi calculates that the total energy produced in the E-Cat is 4906.1 watt hours per hour. The total energy consumed is 770 watt hours per hour. Thus, according to Mr. Rossi's calculations the E-Cat used in his demonstration achieved an energy output/input ratio of approximately 6.37. In hot fusion terms the E-Cat (the one used in this particular demonstration, at least) appears to have achieved Q = 6.37.

To put this claim in perspective, the Joint European Torus (JET) magnetic confinement fusion experiment achieved Q = 0.67 in 1997, which still remains the world record for fusion power in the high-energy plasma fusion realm. Right now the focus of hot fusion research is on achieving Q = 1, with somewhat less attention being given to the practical concerns of converting useful amounts of fusion energy into electrical power. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's National Ignition Facility (NIF) laser fusion experiment is currently expected to achieve Q = 1 next year. The only other hot fusion experiment for which such a claim is made is dark horse Lawrenceville Plasma Physics' Focus Fusion-1 (FF-1), which is hoped to achieve Q = 1 in a similar time frame. What is widely regarded as the safest bet for fusion power, ITER, isn't expected to achieve Q = 1 until at least 2026, assuming the current schedule holds.

By contrast, cold fusion researchers have been claiming an energy output/input ratio of greater than 1 for years now, though not to the extent that Mr. Rossi has. Rumors are that Francesco Piantelli, a former colleague of Mr. Rossi's partner Sergio Focardi, will be announcing a similar claim soon, but for now it looks like Mr. Rossi is in the lead. The next hurdles: the University of Bologna's tests on the E-Cat and the Greek authorities' tests on Defkalion Green Technologies' Hyperion products. If Mr. Rossi's device makes it through these tests successfully it appears the way will be open for the final test: customer opinion.

Check here for Steven Krivit's continuing reports on his visit to Bologna.

DGT is in discussions [with Ampenergo?] to sell their products in the USA.
DGT’s investors are a group of friends of the Greek diaspora who attended the same university in Canada.
The 5 to 30 kW modules are all the same size, the only difference being the pressure, so they will cost the same.
The 1 MW reactor is now being tested, and DGT is working on producing a 3 MW reactor.
DGT is only producing the units, not distributing or marketing them.
It will take five years of production for DGT to meet the demand of the orders they’ve received so far.
Every six months the units will be serviced by technicians employed by the distributors, but trained by Defkalion.
The reactors have twelve levels of security; nevertheless, somebody will break the security sooner or later. Defkalion is depending primarily on legal protections and the low cost of the units to discourage competitors from producing Hyperion knock-offs.

Andrea Rossi, the energy catalyzer inventor, has reached an agreement with a new company in the United States. The agreement builds on several years of contacts with people linked to the U.S. Department of Energy.

My bold.

I guess the Dept of Energy is too shy to come onto the stage.

The founders of Ampenergo are Karl Norwood, Richard Noceti, Robert Gentile and Craig Cassarino.

Picture of Craig.

So someone with money sees this as an engineering demonstration and does not confuse it with a scientific experiment.

And then Dr. Brian Ahern of AMES national laboratory demonstrates repeatability. He only gets 5 watts of excess energy. This is energy that cannot be accounted for. No matter how small, it just shoulden't be there.

This is what a retired (CSIRO - Australia's Science Peak Body) energy scintist thought of this when I asked for his opinion:

Dear Mike,

I had a quick look at this stuff on cold fusion. It has been talked about for years, but totally discredited scientifically. There are Nickel Hydride batteries, but that is only for energy storage. I did a quick Google search of “andrea rossi cold fusion” because it seems to have originated with Andrea Rossi at the University of Bologna. There, I came across the interesting comment:

Rossi and Focardi’s paper on the nuclear reactor has been rejected by peer-reviewed journals, but the scientists aren’t discouraged. They published their paper in the Journal of Nuclear Physics, an online journal founded and run by themselves, which is obviously cause for a great deal of skepticism. They say their paper was rejected because they lack a theory for how the reaction works. According to a press release in Google translate, the scientists say they cannot explain how the cold fusion is triggered, “but the presence of copper and the release of energy are witnesses.”

In other words, it is a fraud. It is what happens when “absolute desperation” meets a smart conman. It is like that joke about “Did you know that the word gullible has been deleted from the dictionary?”

Apparently, their 1 MW unit is due to be launched this month, so let us wait and see! For details of this unit, see:

If it really is a success and/or if the mysterious US investor really is DARPA, then it should be blindingly obvious that this cold fusion device will disappear into the US military's hideous arsenal and be used to power yet more weapons of mass destruction and mass coercion while at the same time being denied to the rest of the world.

I think the powers that be are preparing themselves to cope with an over-populated world of shrinking resources of every kind, especially food, and they need ways to deal with the inevitable food and water riots and wars. Cold fusion — IF it really works — would give them another means to control all who oppose them and not be forced into the use of nuclear or biological weapons, and to look benign all the time. In other words, cold fusion would enable and (em)power a police world rather than a military world.